4.7 Article

Mepolizumab as a steroid-sparing treatment option in patients with Churg-Strauss syndrome

Journal

JOURNAL OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY
Volume 125, Issue 6, Pages 1336-1343

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2010.03.028

Keywords

Churg-Strauss syndrome; eosinophilia; IL-5; asthma; mepolizumah; steroid sparing

Funding

  1. GlaxoSmithKline
  2. Aerovance
  3. Ception Therapeutics
  4. Genentech
  5. Icagen
  6. Johnson Johnson
  7. MedImmune
  8. National Institutes of Health
  9. Novartis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Treatments for Churg-Strauss syndrome (CSS), a rare eosinophilic vasculitis characterized by asthma, sinusitis, peripheral eosinophilia, pulmonary infiltrates, and tissue infiltration, are limited by toxicity or poor efficacy. Levels of IL-5, a cytokine regulating eosinophils, can be increased in patients with CSS. Mepolizumab, a humanized monoclonal anti IL-5 antibody, decreases steroid requirements in patients with non-CSS hypereosinophilic syndromes. Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess whether mepolizumab would safely allow corticosteroid tapering in patients with steroid-dependent CSS while decreasing serum markers of disease activity. Methods: This open-label pilot study treated 7 patients with 4 monthly doses of mepolizumab to assess whether it safely decreased CSS disease activity and permitted tapering of systemic corticosteroids. Results: Mepolizumab was safe and well tolerated in patients with CSS. Mepolizumab reduced eosinophil counts and allowed for safe corticosteroid reduction in all 7 subjects. On cessation of mepolizumab, CSS manifestations recurred, necessitating corticosteroid bursts. Conclusion: Mepolizumab is a safe and well-tolerated therapy in patients with CSS, offering clinical benefit by enabling corticosteroid tapering while maintaining clinical stability. (J Allergy Clin Immunol 2010;125:1336-43.)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available